Reference for Gallienus- Orientis

[Jerome Holderman]

Looking on the Gallienus website I see a couple possibilities for this great coin but none have me completely convinced they are a match.
Gobl 1677 seems a decent match but the portrait style is very different
Gobl 1685 seems a better match for the portrait but my coin is missing the two pellets in the exergue
Gobl 1700 matches legends but the style seems way off.

If I am reading the tables correctly it is showing all three of these coins as being from Samosata mint. Did any other mint have a RESTITVT ORIENTIS reverse with IMP CP LIC GALLIENVS PF AVG obverse?

Here is the coin 22mm, 3.8gm

[newbeonecoinobe]

Hi in RIC V III it looks like #448 if I am reading it right.

good luck
Pete

[Jerome Holderman]

Close but Not quite. RIC 448 is missing the PF in the obverse legend.

Thanks for looking though!

Jerome

[Postumus14]

I believe it would be Gobl 1685m.
Gobl 1677 does not contain "PF" in the obverse legend.
Gobl 1700 is a possibility but it has four distinct types: no mark, wreath, wreath with dot inside and star.  I do not know of a Gallienus "Restitvt orientis" (Gobl 1700) without a mark.  Admitedly, I am not certain how Gobl 1685m would be distinguished from a Gobl 1700 no mark.
As you observed, Gobl 1685m can also contain pellets in the exergue.  Gobl classified one pellet as Gobl 1685m(2), two pellets as Gobl 1685m(3) and three pellets as Gobl 1685m(4).
Hope that makes sense, as it is unlikely to simplify things.

[Jerome Holderman]

Thanks Postumus,

Another case where owning the book has the edge on on line reference. Does Gobl mention anything in regards to rarity? I have searched everywhere I can think of and not found another example of this coin other than the 1685m(3) on the Gallienus web site.

Regards,
Jerome

[Postumus14]

Gobl recorded 18 examples which by his system suggests the type is fairly common.

Gobl does not, of course, record the condition of each example he had available to him and yours is a very nice example.

However, as I am rushing off to work now, I will try to conduct a more thorough review later.

[newbeonecoinobe]

Jerome you are correct on the RIC 448 but if you look at the C-902, C-903 902 is like 448 and 903 is listed as a varient of 902 with the addition of the PF to the obverse legend and the rarity or cost in Cohen states 4 same as the one without the PF.

Good Luck
pete

[Jerome Holderman]

Ahhh.. Thanks Pete, I had not investigated the Cohen Cross reference. !!